What's new

Pakistanis one of the most racially tolerant countries in the world

Yes raping of women is bad and it happens quite a lot here. It gets reported and people are punished.
Now two things are involved over here.
a)Prevalence of crime
b)Reporting of crime

Reporting of crime is further divided into:
1. Good policing principles- taking FIRs hassle free. Public confidence in the state police,etc
2. Victims wanting retribution/justice without the fear of backlash by the society/perpatrators of the crime

b) quantifies a). You can not manage what you can not measure.
Now the question is, how confidantly can you say that Pakistan has less of prevalence of rape when the reporting of crime is not being looked into?


And as far as India being an embarassment to the region is concerned:

Strong economic growth
Prosperity
Democracy
Political accountability
R&D investment
Diversity of the population
Number of research papers published
Number of graduates/1000 people

These are some of the metrics that I had at the top of my mind which would give a fair idea of the standing of a country along with the UNHRD indices. You are free to evaluate your country against mine.

Making such unintelligent sweeping statements are unbecoming of a senior member like you, especially if they can be hurtfull to so many.

This research is based on a very ambiguous question:
"Who do you want to be living across the street to?"

Thats to me talks more about our strong social ties than anything else. We are a collectivist society.
This is not hollistic at all.

what good is democracy if india fails it badly? i mean gujrat massacre, barbi mosque fiasco all happened in the so called biggest democracy in the world and where the states ban eating beef?

a democracy where there is little tolerance for the minority
 
Take dat **** somewhere else nazi.


Pakistanis are known for their mehman-nawazi, the world through-out.

Didn't like my words?



Pakistanis are known for their mehman-nawazi, the world through-out.

We're not talking about "guests" here, but neighbors.

The way Pakistanis and other Muslims immigrants have cordoned off certain neighborhoods in the UK and other Europeans countries to people of other faiths and races is only a little sample of "Pakistani racial tolerance".

I don't say this as a way to insult Pakistan or Pakistanis (i am one myself), but its retarded to say that Racism doesn't exist or that a certain groups of people is less Racist than the other.

Everyone is equally racist. And racism is a part of human nature. So as i said, if Pakistan was to be flooded by millions of hindus/Dalits from india or millions of Haitians from Haiti i'm sure every Pakistani will start wearing pointy sheets on their heads (maybe that's a little exaggerated, but you get the point).

To say that a certain group pf people are not racist just because they haven't been exposed to a large amount of people of another race/culture is pathetic since one can't come to such conclusion without doing so.
 
A fascinating map of the world’s most and least racially tolerant countries- washingtonpost


racism-map2.jpg


When two Swedish economists set out to examine whether economic freedom made people any more or less racist, they knew how they would gauge economic freedom, but they needed to find a way to measure a country’s level of racial tolerance. So they turned to something called the World Values Survey, which has been measuring global attitudes and opinions for decades.
Among the dozens of questions that World Values asks, the Swedish economists found one that, they believe, could be a pretty good indicator of tolerance for other races. The survey asked respondents in more than 80 different countries to identify kinds of people they would not want as neighbors. Some respondents, picking from a list, chose “people of a different race.” The more frequently that people in a given country say they don’t want neighbors from other races, the economists reasoned, the less racially tolerant you could call that society. (The study concluded that economic freedom had no correlation with racial tolerance, but it does appear to correlate with tolerance toward homosexuals.)

Unfortunately, the Swedish economists did not include all of the World Values Survey data in their final research paper. So I went back to the source, compiled the original data and mapped it out on the infographic above. In the bluer countries, fewer people said they would not want neighbors of a different race; in red countries, more people did.
If we treat this data as indicative of racial tolerance, then we might conclude that people in the bluer countries are the least likely to express racist attitudes, while the people in red countries are the most likely.
Before we dive into the data, a couple of caveats. First, it’s entirely likely that some people lied when answering this question; it would be surprising if they hadn’t. But the operative question, unanswerable, is whether people in certain countries were more or less likely to answer the question honestly. For example, while the data suggest that Swedes are more racially tolerant than Finns, it’s possible that the two groups are equally tolerant but that Finns are just more honest. The willingness to state such a preference out loud, though, might be an indicator of racial attitudes in itself. Second, the survey is not conducted every year; some of the results are very recent and some are several years old, so we’re assuming the results are static, which might not be the case.



Here’s what the data show:
• Anglo and Latin countries most tolerant. People in the survey were most likely to embrace a racially diverse neighbor in the United Kingdom and its Anglo former colonies (the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) and in Latin America. The only real exceptions were oil-rich Venezuela, where income inequality sometimes breaks along racial lines, and the Dominican Republic, perhaps because of its adjacency to troubled Haiti. Scandinavian countries also scored high.
• India, Jordan, Bangladesh and Hong Kong by far the least tolerant. In only three of 81 surveyed countries, more than 40 percent of respondents said they would not want a neighbor of a different race. This included 43.5 percent of Indians, 51.4 percent of Jordanians and an astonishingly high 71.8 percent of Hong Kongers and 71.7 percent of Bangladeshis.

• Wide, interesting variation across Europe. Immigration and national identity are big, touchy issues in much of Europe, where racial make-ups are changing. Though you might expect the richer, better-educated Western European nations to be more tolerant than those in Eastern Europe, that’s not exactly the case. France appeared to be one of the least racially tolerant countries on the continent, with 22.7 percent saying they didn’t want a neighbor of another race. Former Soviet states such as Belarus and Latvia scored as more tolerant than much of Europe. Many in the Balkans, perhaps after years of ethnicity-tinged wars, expressed lower racial tolerance.

• The Middle East not so tolerant. Immigration is also a big issue in this region, particularly in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which often absorb economic migrants from poorer neighbors.

• Racial tolerance low in diverse Asian countries. Nations such as Indonesia and the Philippines, where many racial groups often jockey for influence and have complicated histories with one another, showed more skepticism of diversity. This was also true, to a lesser extent, in China and Kyrgyzstan. There were similar trends in parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

• South Korea, not very tolerant, is an outlier. Although the country is rich, well-educated, peaceful and ethnically homogenous – all trends that appear to coincide with racial tolerance – more than one in three South Koreans said they do not want a neighbor of a different race. This may have to do with Korea’s particular view of its own racial-national identity as unique – studied by scholars such as B.R. Myers – and with the influx of Southeast Asian neighbors and the nation’s long-held tensions with Japan.

• Pakistan, remarkably tolerant, also an outlier. Although the country has a number of factors that coincide with racial intolerance – sectarian violence, its location in the least-tolerant region of the world, low economic and human development indices – only 6.5 percent of Pakistanis objected to a neighbor of a different race. This would appear to suggest Pakistanis are more racially tolerant than even the Germans or the Dutch

:pakistan::pakistan::pakistan:


Wrong question...In Pakistan's case it should have been 'people from a different religion/denomination of Islam'
 
The idea of racial purity is central to Hindu nationalists in India who have a long history of admiration for the Nazi leader, including his "Final Solution".

In his book "We" (1939), Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, the leader of the Hindu Nationalist RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) wrote, "To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races -- the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by."

Haq's Musings: Hindu Nationalists Admire Nazis and Israel in India?
 
Somehow I doubt this is true, because it relies too much upon polling rather than evaluating actions on a day to day basis.

We all probably have different definitions of racial tolerance....if it means everyone should be equal before the law, most people would agree, other things like interracial marriage may be more controversial.

I don't know what the classifications of race really mean....as in Pakistan there would be people who could pass for white and people who could pass for black and everything in between. There is a world of a difference between what another pakistani who is technically another race versus an immigrant from another country. Many in Pakistan disapprove of the Afghan refugees in pakistan which could be described as prejudice but not racism.

The studies' reliance upon whom someone would like to be a neighbor of is a flaw because that does not necessarily entail racism. I'd be curious to know how many Pakistanis would approve of a relative of theirs marrying someone of a different race....somehow I think many would not like it....for better or worse.
 
The idea of racial purity is central to Hindu nationalists in India who have a long history of admiration for the Nazi leader, including his "Final Solution".

In his book "We" (1939), Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, the leader of the Hindu Nationalist RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) wrote, "To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races -- the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by."

Haq's Musings: Hindu Nationalists Admire Nazis and Israel in India?

There is only one country ic South Asia that killed 3 million of its own people because of the pathetic notions of racial superiority.

Having seen only grotesque caricatures of history, it is impossible for Pakistan’s youth to understand 1971. But how can I blame them? Those of us who grew up in the 1950s and 1960s knew in our hearts that East and West Pakistan were one country but not one nation. Young people today cannot imagine the rampant anti-Bengali racism among West Pakistanis then. With great shame, I must admit that, as a thoughtless young boy, I, too, felt embarrassed about small and dark people being among my compatriots. Victims of a delusion, we thought that good Muslims and Pakistanis were tall, fair and spoke chaste Urdu. Some schoolmates would laugh at the strange sounding Bengali news broadcasts from Radio Pakistan.

Shahbag Square

And even now, we can all see the pathetic and false sense of racial superiority among many of you, when you try to be wannabe "pure" Arabs/Turks/Afghans and sundry others.

One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines. And many Hindus converted to Islam to further their military or civil service careers. As a result of this intermingling, despite proud boasts of pure bloodlines, most Pakistanis have many Hindu ancestors.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

Calling the BD people "low lying people of a low lying land" whose rapine and genocide renewed their faith" ("imaan taaza ho gaya" exclaimed a tribal West Pakistani bureaucrat who saw it happening), does that equate to Racial tolerance?

Roedad Khan, that incorrigible Pakistani bureaucrat, glowed at dawn on March 26, 1971. As Bengalis were shot down, he exclaimed: "Yaar, iman taaza ho gya." Pakistan must someday weep for that comment. And then we will forget.

Forget 1971, says Pakistan

The happenings in Karachi?

It is funny to see the denial and pathetic self-congratulation of one of the most intolerant countries in the world.

One that has wiped out it's religious minorities almost entirely and now has turned on the Muslim sects and ethnic minorities!
 
There is only one country ic South Asia that killed 3 million of its own people because of the pathetic notions of racial superiority.



Shahbag Square

And even now, we can all see the pathetic and false sense of racial superiority among many of you, when you try to be wannabe "pure" Arabs/Turks/Afghans and sundry others.



Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

Calling the BD people "low lying people of a low lying land" whose rapine and genocide renewed their faith" ("imaan taaza ho gaya" exclaimed a tribal West Pakistani bureaucrat who saw it happening), does that equate to Racial tolerance?

Roedad Khan, that incorrigible Pakistani bureaucrat, glowed at dawn on March 26, 1971. As Bengalis were shot down, he exclaimed: "Yaar, iman taaza ho gya." Pakistan must someday weep for that comment. And then we will forget.

Forget 1971, says Pakistan

The happenings in Karachi?

It is funny to see the denial and pathetic self-congratulation of one of the most intolerant countries in the world.

One that has wiped out it's religious minorities almost entirely and now has turned on the Muslim sects and ethnic minorities!

Indian lies already debunked. 71 was Indian state terrorism thats all nobody spares those who rebel against own country.

and you must take care of Mezoram operation where India is the first country of the world who used airbombing against own citizens.

move on . You Indians must debate by you are on top of racists on that map.
 
Indian lies already debunked. 71 was Indian state terrorism thats all nobody spares those who rebel against own country.

and you must take care of Mezoram operation where India is the first country of the world who used airbombing against own citizens.

move on . You Indians must debate by you are on top of racists on that map.

Denial doesn't help.

All these Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Tikka Khan, Niazi, Roedad Khan....

All those people responsible for the genocide.

One can see a pattern. ;)
 
Most of the communities in India live isolated from other religions and castes. So this is no surprise.
 
Most of the communities in India live isolated from other religions and castes. So this is no surprise.

You are wrong.

Most Indian cities are quite cosmopolitan with people from all over the country staying as neighbors.

And most don't even know, nor care about these things.
 
You are wrong.

Most Indian cities are quite cosmopolitan with people from all over the country staying as neighbors.

And most don't even know, nor care about these things.

Major cities may be, not the village or under developed areas which consists of a VERY large percentage.
 
Back
Top Bottom